Live data from Hacker News

Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

wikimediafoundation.org

41–50 of 192 posts

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#41
Somehow I have the deja-vu of when Theresa May (as a Home Secretary) tried to ban personal encryption altogether. Let me remind everyone this is in a country that already has a law that says you're legally required to give your encryption key to the police and if you do not, even if there is no other crime you can get 2 years in jail...

This told me all I needed to know about her level of understanding of complex topics. It only went downhill from there.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#42
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Shutdown in the UK? Yes. This is what every single large company which is subject to this distopian law should do. They should do everything they can to block any traffic from the UK, until the law is repelled.

large companies love this law. By imposing costs and risk on self hosting, and reducing the number of supplies (because many small and medium companies and organisation will block the UK), it reduces competition.

The reality is the vast majority of users will just not submit their ID and the large companies will lose most of their UK traffic.

There was a study by Amazon [1] that showed that every 100ms of extra load time of a page cost 1% of revenue. How much revenue do you think adding an ID verification that takes 10 minutes to complete cost???

You think PornHub loves this law???

[1] https://www.conductor.com/academy/page-speed-resources/faq/a...

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#43
post #37

All this is of course bullshit. The only response that would have a chance of succeeding would have been if most websites collectively just blocked everyone from the UK. Imagine if 60-70% of the internet just stopped working for UK People. The law would be toppled tomorrow. Every Company that implemented any compliance is a traitor to the free internet and should be treated as such.

Most websites, for most people, are big tech. Big tech loves this regulation because imposing compliance costs reduces competition.

The problem is, that both pornhub and facebook also love underage (well, too young) users, because those users will stay there.

Cutting off UK for a few weeks won't cause that much damage but might help them in the long run.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#44
post #5

I'm surprised they haven't deployed a big banner à la Jimmy Wales begging for donations to UK users re this law yet

I think most Wikimedia users would consider it inapropriate to mix fundraising and public policy initiatives.

I believe public policy initiatives are already Wikimedia's second-biggest expenses, after salaries, so I don't see how that would be much more different than usual fundraising except for making it more transparent.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#45

In related news, the Labour party is already considering banning VPNs. We almost got like two days of Online Safety Act in effect. https://www.gbnews.com/politics/labour-ban-vpn-online-safety...

You're repeating propaganda from a far right newspaper headline, written misleadingly to make it sound like labour have said something recently about VPNs (they haven't)

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#47

In related news, the Labour party is already considering banning VPNs. We almost got like two days of Online Safety Act in effect. https://www.gbnews.com/politics/labour-ban-vpn-online-safety...

I think that article references a discussion from 2022 rather than something new as the headline implies.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#48
post #36

I'm skeptical this goes anywhere legally speaking. The categorisation regulations are a statutory instrument rather than primary legislation, so they _are_ open to judicial review. But the Wikimedia foundation haven't presented an argument as to why the regulations are unlawful, just an argument for why they disagree with them. It should be noted that even if they succeed (which seems a long shot), this wouldn't affe…

The problem with the focus being on porn behind age verification as the main effect, is that it ignores all the other effects. Closing community forums and wikis. Uncertainty about blog comments. It is actually (as noted in many previous discussion about the Online Safety Act) pushing people to using big tech platforms, because they can no longer afford the compliance cost and risk of running their own.

If you have examples of this happening, please add them to the ORG list: https://www.blocked.org.uk/osa-blocks

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#49
post #41

Somehow I have the deja-vu of when Theresa May (as a Home Secretary) tried to ban personal encryption altogether. Let me remind everyone this is in a country that already has a law that says you're legally required to give your encryption key to the police and if you do not, even if there is no other crime you can get 2 years in jail... This told me all I needed to know about her level of understanding of complex top…

Even low-grade encryption was actually forbidden in France for a while in the mid 90s. I remember snickering about the whole thing back then, in a much smaller but also quite similar forum.

https://www.theregister.com/1999/01/15/france_to_end_severe_...

> Until 1996 anyone wishing to encrypt any document had to first receive an official sanction or risk fines from F6000 to F500,000 ($1000 to $89,300) and a 2-6 month jail term. Right now, apart from a handful of exemptions, any unauthorised use of encryption software is illegal.

These two former empires seem/seemed to have an over-inflated sense of importance and ability to control the world.

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#50
post #36

I'm skeptical this goes anywhere legally speaking. The categorisation regulations are a statutory instrument rather than primary legislation, so they _are_ open to judicial review. But the Wikimedia foundation haven't presented an argument as to why the regulations are unlawful, just an argument for why they disagree with them. It should be noted that even if they succeed (which seems a long shot), this wouldn't affe…

The problem with the focus being on porn behind age verification as the main effect, is that it ignores all the other effects. Closing community forums and wikis. Uncertainty about blog comments. It is actually (as noted in many previous discussion about the Online Safety Act) pushing people to using big tech platforms, because they can no longer afford the compliance cost and risk of running their own.

> pushing people to using big tech platforms

so big tech platforms will cheerfully embrace it. as expected, major players love regulations.

Post reply on HN